Objective: Pay-for-performance (P4P) initiatives hold promise for improving health care delivery but are rarely applied to behavioral health or tested in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This RCT examined the effectiveness of a P4P initiative to reduce total cost of 24-hour care among patients with high needs for psychiatric care in a large county in California.
Methods: From August 2016 to March 2022, a total of 652 adult residents of Santa Clara County, California, were enrolled in a P4P initiative (mean±SD age=46.7±13.3 years, 61% male, 51% White, and 60% diagnosed as having a bipolar or psychotic disorder). Participants were randomly assigned to usual full-service partnerships from the county (N=327) or a comparable level of care from a contractor who agreed to a schedule of financial penalties and rewards based on whether enrollees (N=325) used more or less care than a historical cohort of similar county patients. The primary outcome was total cost of 24-hour psychiatric services. Secondary outcomes were costs of each of the 24-hour care services.
Results: The proportion of the total sample that used 24-hour psychiatric services decreased over the 36-month study period. Intent-to-treat analyses revealed no differences between the two study conditions in total care costs during the follow-up period. No significant care utilization differences were observed between the two conditions in most of the individual 24-hour services.
Conclusions: A P4P initiative for high-need patients was no more effective than usual care for reducing costs of 24-hour psychiatric care.
Keywords: Behavioral health; Community psychiatry; High-need, high-cost patients; Pay-for-performance; Randomized controlled trial; Reimbursement.